An Atheist Society

[Lightkeeper]

We have heard on this forum a few times that religion should be left out of politics and also about the possibility of an atheistic society.

This has been tried. Communism in the USSR wasn't successful. Can an atheistic society flourish?

[arthra]

What we have in most modern or contemporary societies in the West is what's called a "secular" society which actually isn't the same thing as an atheist society.. In my view a secular state or society doesn't repress religion but allows for it while an atheist society would most likely repress religion as in the Soviet Union.. or maybe as in modern China to a degree.

It will take some time I believe for social adjustments and reconciliations to be made but I think in the future there can be a better balance in civil liberties between say between secular, religious and scientific communities.

- Art

[Asimov]

Originally Posted by Lightkeeper

This has been tried. Communism in the USSR wasn't successful. Can an atheistic society flourish?

What does communism have to do with atheism?

[evangelicalhumanist]

Originally Posted by Asimov

What does communism have to do with atheism?

Nothing, but it makes theists feel good to equate the two.

The question I would ask is very simply, "what does religion have to do with politics?" I can show some practical ways in which it's extremely detrimental.

And the moment you start including "god" and religion into your politics, you'd better be very careful to weed out all of those elements in your society which today we would call pluralistic -- people of other religions, people of no religion, people who are different from what the religion says they should be, for example. Because if you don't, your political theology is going to have to deal with them, and as the world has shown, in theocracies around the world, that is usually pretty ugly. Unless, of course, you happen to really get off on watching people being stoned to death. I don't, particularly, but then I don't enjoy watching fighters trying to punch each other's lights out, either. I'm weird.)

Politics is about what we all do together. If you include religion in it, then you automatically exclude some members of the body politic. Automatically. Still, I suppose the political theology could always invent some nice "Dhimmi laws" to protect those who don't quite fit in to our nice little theocracy...

[metis]

Originally Posted by Lightkeeper

We have heard on this forum a few times that religion should be left out of politics and also about the possibility of an atheistic society... Can an atheistic society flourish?

I don't think it's possible to have a complete separation of church and state, except on paper. Politics and religion both reflect moralty and, in a democracy, that tends to be the morality of the majority. Now, there's a danger that this majority could run rampant over other groups, and that, hopefully, should be avoided.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau had an interesting take on this. He felt that the society should reflect the religious morality of the majority but still extend as much freedom of religion to other faiths as possible. He disagreed with John Locke's separation of church and state idea as leaving the state with a limited sense of morality-- sort of like a ship with no rudder. I don't know what he would have said if the majority in a particular state was either atheistic or agnostic.

[evangelicalhumanist]

Originally Posted by metis

I don't think it's possible to have a complete separation of church and state, except on paper. Politics and religion both reflect moralty and, in a democracy, that tends to be the morality of the majority. Now, there's a danger that this majority could run rampant over other groups, and that, hopefully, should be avoided.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau had an interesting take on this. He felt that the society should reflect the religious morality of the majority but still extend as much freedom of religion to other faiths as possible. He disagreed with John Locke's separation of church and state idea as leaving the state with a limited sense of morality-- sort of like a ship with no rudder. I don't know what he would have said if the majority in a particular state was either atheistic or agnostic.

There we go again! The notion that without religion, morality is necessarily limited is completely without foundation. Religion is absolutely unnecessary in the formation of laws having to do with how we behave towards one another.

It is absurd to assume that I would not know not to kill or steal or molest children without a specific commandment from God. (And by the way, that last one about children? It isn't there!)

[Tonyamendola]

I have to say I think we would all come to truth alot quicker without Religion

I cant see us not asking "is there something more" just because Religion doesnt exist
I cant see us laying aside Love or Humanism because Religions dont exist

It appears those traits and questions are "built in"

[Amergin]

Originally Posted by evangelicalhumanist

There we go again! The notion that without religion, morality is necessarily limited is completely without foundation. Religion is absolutely unnecessary in the formation of laws having to do with how we behave towards one another.

I get so tired of that lie. Morality is actually very much tied into rational thinking, scepticism, and rational inhibition of dangerous behaviour. It evolved with us for millions of years. We were selected out by a form of social evolution that selectively eliminated people who assaulted fellow tribe members, stole from others, failed to share, assaulted a woman (daughter or wife of someone or a child,) or acted destructively (like setting fires or pissing in the wine pots.) Those who did those things, especially repeatedly were killed or banished, or forbidden to marry a big bloke's daughter.

While religion at first tended to reinforce such morals by simply plagiarising them as commandments, it became a tool of political power. And as Lord Acton said, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." There came the terrible 1700 year history of the Christian Church, wars, persecutions, genocides, witch trials, heretic burnings, clerical celibacy (unnatural.) Then the fat Kraut with the bald head, Martin Luther came along and cancelled the benefits of religion by preaching that sin doesn't count. One is saved by faith alone, no matter how bloody dreadful a bastard one is.

Today we see the statistical result of that. Countries with the greatest religiosity have the highest crime rates and homicide rates while those with the weakening of religion and rise of secularism have the lowest rates. The US has 95% religious population and 5% Non-theists. But US prisons have only 0.2% Non-Theists. Poverty, parental deprivation, and claims of belief by convicts to get early parole, play some role but not enough to explain such a wide variance.

Originally Posted by evangelicalhumanist

It is absurd to assume that I would not know not to kill or steal or molest children without a specific commandment from God. (And by the way, that last one about children? It isn't there!)

Exactly. Being slightly off topic, I will post on the Thread topic next.

Amergin

[Amergin]

Originally Posted by Lightkeeper

We have heard on this forum a few times that religion should be left out of politics and also about the possibility of an atheistic society.

That would be unrealistic and contrary to human nature. In a country with even 50% theists to one with larger or smaller percentages, those who believe have equal rights to those of us who do not believe in Gods or religions. An ideal society is one in which the rights of all individuals are respected with the lone exception that nobody has a right to nullify the right of another. We all have a right to fire guns in safe conditions, but not to use them to kill people. That would violate the other person's higher right to live. Each of us has a right to believe in whatever pleases us but nobody has a right to prohibit, persecute, or discriminate against another person whose beliefs or non-beliefs are different. I am opposed to an Atheist Society as much as a Christian Society. The only fair society is a free and secular society in which religious people are NOT banned from politics but limited in imposing their purely religious beliefs on those who do not believe. Secular does not mean Atheist. It means neutral or equally protective of all.

Originally Posted by Lightkeeper

This has been tried. Communism in the USSR wasn't successful. Can an atheistic society flourish?

First you made a big error in using Communism as an example. It is a political and economic system in which the author of the major book was an Atheist. If you use Communism as an example of Atheist Society then you cannot rebut one who argues that Nazi Germany was a Christian Society. Hitler claimed he was Christian, and he ended separation of Church and State from the Weimar Secular Republic to make Catholic and Lutheran Christianity the State Official Co-Religions of the Third Reich by law. Workers paid tax to one or the other church by law. But I am not claiming that it is fair to attack Christians with the fact that Nazis were Christians and Mein Kampf defended Christianity.

Communism failed but religion had nothing to do with it failing. Communism failed because it advocated a political system of oppressive totalitarianism and an economic system that did not reward hard work and initiative but permitted laziness and sloppy work to pass. Religion or anti-Religion had very little long term significance to the existence of the USSR.

The USA is widely viewed around the world as the International Bully, replacing the broken Communist Bloc and the deceased Axis Powers. That is sad. The USA is the most vocally religious nations in the world despite its secular constitution and First Amendment. But internationally it is seen as a fascist like Theocracy headed by George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the Neo-Cons who are allied by the blind following of the right wing Evangelopaths (Christian extremists who are the equivalent of Islamic Jihadists.) Obviously at 70% disapproval ratings of the Republican Junta in the polls, most Christians are not Evangelopaths or Neo-Conservatives.

American Christians are good people who are unhappy with the Neo-Con Evangelopath Jihadist government of Mr. Bush. They should impeach that cowardly and malevolent gob$hite.

Amergin

[shaw-n]

Atheism is the non-prophet sector.
An atheist is a man with no invisible means of support.